Öğretimde Sosyal Adalet İnançları Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Uyarlaması

Year 2017, , 295 - 309, 25.08.2017

Melehat Gezer

https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.335868

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu araştırmada, Enterline, Cochran-Smith, Ludlow ve Mitescu, (2008) tarafından geliştirilen Öğretimde Sosyal Adalet İnançları Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye uyarlanması ve ölçeğin psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma, 2016-2017 Eğitim-Öğretim Yılı Güz Dönemi’nde, Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi İlköğretim Bölümü’nde öğrenim gören 263 öğretmen adayından oluşan bir çalışma grubu üzerinde yürütülmüştür. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliğini ortaya koymak için Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi uygulanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi sonuçları, ölçeğin orijinal formundaki iki faktörlü yapının Türk örnekleminde doğrulandığını göstermiştir. Ölçeğin güvenirliği bileşik güvenirlik katsayısı ile hesaplanmıştır. Ölçek için hesaplanan bileşik güvenirlik katsayıları, olumlu alt ölçeği için .63, olumsuz boyut için .62 olarak bulunmuştur.  Madde analizi sonucunda, düzeltilmiş madde toplam korelasyonlarının Olumlu alt ölçeği için .31 ile .47; Olumsuz alt ölçeği için .26 ile .43 arasında sıralandığı ve %27’lik alt-üst grupların ortalamaları arasındaki farkların ölçekte yer alan tüm maddeler (12. madde dışında) için anlamlı olduğu belirlenmiştir. Araştırmada ulaşılan sonuçlar, ölçeğin Türkçe formunun geçerli ve güvenilir ölçümler üreten bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Sosyal adalet, sosyal adalet inancı ölçeği, ölçek uyarlama

The Turkish Adaptation of Learning to Teach for Social Justice–Beliefs Scale

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to adapt the Learning to Teach for Social Justice– Beliefs (LTSJ–B) Scale to Turkish and to investigate its psychometric properties. The research was conducted on a study group who consisted of 263 teacher candidates during 2016-2017 education year first semester. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed in order to measure the scale's construct validity. The CFA results indicated that the two-factor structure in the original form of the scale was confirmed in the Turkish sample. The reliability of the scale was calculated via composite reliability and it was found as .63 for positive and .62 for negative dimension respectively. The item analysis reported that the corrected item total correlations ranged from .31. and .47 for positive, and .26 and .43 for negative dimensions and the differences between the top and bottom 27% groups were significant for all the items (except the item with number 12) included in the scale. Based on these results could be argued that the Turkish form of the scale is reliable and valid instrument that can be used in order to determine teacher candidates’ beliefs for learning to teach for social justice.

Keywords

Social justice, social justice– beliefs scale, scale adaptation

References

• Agarwal, R., Epstein, S., Oppenheim, R., Oyler, C. ve Sonu, D. (2009). From Ideal to Practice and Back Again: Beginning Teachers Teaching for Social Justice. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3), 237-247.
• Athanases, S. ve de Oliviera, L. C. (2007). Conviction, Confrontation, and Risk in New Teachers’ Advocating for Equity. Teaching Education, 18(2), 123-136.
• Bagozzi, R. P. ve Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
• Banks, J. A. ve Banks, C. A. M. (2004). Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives (5th Ed.). Washington, D. C.: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
• Banks, J. A. (1995). Multicultural Education: Historical Development, Dimensions and Practice. In J.A. Banks & C.A.M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (3-24). New York: Macmillan.
• Banks, J.A. (2007). Diversity and Citizenship Education: Global Perspectives. John Wiley & Sons Press.
• Banks, J.A. (2013). Çokkültürlü Eğitime Giriş. (H. Aydın, Çev.) İstanbul: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Barazanji, D. ve Nilsson, J. E. (2008). Teacher Social Justice Advocacy: The Initial Development of Items and Exploration of Internal Consistency and Validity. Unpublished Master's Thesis. University of Missouri-Kansas City.
• Bennett, C.I. (2002). Enhancing Ethnic Diversity at A Big Ten University Through Project TEAM: A Case Study in Teacher Education. Educational Researcher, 31(2), 21-29.
• Bentler, P.M. (1980). Multivariate Analysis with Latent Variables: Causal Modeling. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 419-456.
• Bentler, P. M. ve Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606.
• Brown, M. ve Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. In K. Bollen & J. Long, (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models (pp. 136-162). London: Sage Publications.
• Burton, S. (2011). Social Justice Beliefs and Practices of Novice Versus Experienced Elementary School Teachers. Unpublished Phd thesis. University of Redlands.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal Bilimler için Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Byrne, B. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group.
• Chicola, N. A. (2007). A View Beyond Tolerance: Teacher Candidate Experiences with Culturally Responsive Education. The International Journal of Learning, 14(8), 211-219.
• Cochran-Smith, M. (2004). Walking the road: Race, Diversity and Social Justice in Teacher Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Cochran-Smith, M., Ludlow, L., Ell, F., O’Leary, M. ve Enterline, S. (2012). Learning to Teach for Social Justice as cross Cultural Concept: Findings from Three Countries. European Journal of Educational Research, 1(2), 171-198.
• Constantine, M., Hage, S., Kindaichi, M. ve Bryant, R. (2007). Social Justice and Multicultural Issues: Implications for the Practice and Training of Counselors and Counseling Psychologists. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85, 24-29.
• Cook, S. W. (1990). Toward a Psychology of Improving Justice: Research on Extending the Equality Principle to Victims of Social Injustice. Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 147-161.
• Darling-Hammond, L., French, J. ve Garcia-Lopez, S.P. (2002). Learning to Teach for Social Justice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
• Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Macmillan.
• Dover, A.G. (2013). Teaching for Social Justice: From Conceptual Frameworks to Classroom Practices. Multicultural Perspectives, 15(1), 3–11.
• Erkuş, A. (2012). Psikolojide Ölçme ve Ölçek Geliştirme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering Statics Using SPSS. London: SAGE Publications.
• Fouad, N., Gerstein, L. H. ve Toporek, R. L. (2006). Social Justice and Counseling Psychology In Context. R.L. Toporek, L.H. Gerstein, N.A. Fouad, G. Roysircar and T. Israel (Eds.), Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action Içinde (1-15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
• Furman, G. C. ve Shields, C.M. (2003). How Can Educational Leaders Promote and Support Social Justice and Democratic Community in Schools? Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, USA.
• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
• Gay, G. (2000). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
• Ginns, P., Loughland, A., Tierney, R., Fryer, L., Amazan, R. ve McCormick, A. (2015). Evaluation of the Learning to Teach for Social Justice Beliefs Scale in an Australian Context. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(2), 311-323.
• Gomez, M. L., Black, R. ve Allen, A. (2007). “Becoming” a Teacher. Teachers College Record, 109(9), 2107-2135.
• Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. ve Grablowsky, B. J. (1979). Multivariate Data Analysis. Tulsa, OK: Pipe Books. Hellman, D., Bazan, D.E., Wagoner, C. ve Heuser, F. (2013, April). Measures of Pre-Service Music Teachers’ Commitment to Social Justice. Full paper presented at the 2013 Annual Conference of The American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
• Hogan, T. ve Rabinowitz, M. (2009). Teacher Expertise and the Development of a Problem Representation. Educational Psychology, 29(2), 153-169.
• Jöreskog, K. G. ve Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User’s Guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.
• Karacan, H., Bağlıbel, M. ve Bindak, R. (2015). Okullarda Sosyal Adalet Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(31), 54-68.
• Katsarou, E., Picower, B. ve Stovall, D. (2010). Acts of Solidarity: Developing Urban Social Justice Educators in the Struggle for Quality Public Education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 37(3), 137-153.
• Kelly-Jackson, C. (2015). Teaching for Social Justice and Equity: The Journey of a Teacher Educator. The New Educator, 11(3), 167-185.
• Kline, R. B. (1994). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. New York: Routledge.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
• Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. American Education Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
• Lalas, J. (2007). Teaching for social justice in multicultural urban schools: Conceptualization and classroom implication. Multicultural Education, 14(3), 17-21.
• Lazar, A. M. (2012). The Possibilities and Challenges of Developing Teachers’ Social Justice Beliefs. Online Yearbook of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 33, 33-40.
• Ludlow, L. H., Enterline, S. ve Cochran-Smith, M. (2008). Learning to Teach for Social Justice-Beliefs Scale: An Application Of Rasch Measurement Principles. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 20, 194-214.
• Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J. ve Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD’s Brief Self-Report Measure of Educational Psychology’s Most Useful Affective Constructs: Cross-Cultural, Psychometric Comparisons across 25 Countries. International Journal of Testing,, 6(4), 311-360.
• Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G. ve Guarino, A. (2006). Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Miller, D. (1999). Principles of Social Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
• Milner, H. R. (2008). Disrupting Deficit Notions of Difference: Counter-Narratives of Teachers and Community in Urban Education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(6), 1573-1598.
• Nieto, S. (2000). Placing Equity Front and Center: Some Thoughts on Transforming Teacher Education for a New Century. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 180-187.
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Pitner, R. O. ve Sakamoto, I. (2005). The Role of Critical Consciousness in Multicultural Practice: Examining How Its Strength Becomes Its Limitation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75(4), 684-694.
• Prilleltensky, I. (2001). Value-Based Praxis in Community Psychology: Moving towards Social Justice and Social Action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(5), 747-778.
• Reagan, E. M., Chen, C. ve Vernikoff, L. (2016). Teachers are Works in Progress: A Mixed Methods Study of Teaching Residents’ Beliefs and Articulations of Teaching for Social Justice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 213-227.
• Seçer, İ. (2013). SPSS ve LISREL ile Pratik Veri Analizi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Taylor, R. ve Wasicsko, M. (2000). The Dispositions to Teach. Retrieved September 21, 2016, from www.education.eku.edu-Dean-The http://www.education.eku.edu-Dean-The Dispositions to Teach.pdf.
• Torres-Harding, S. R., Siers, B. ve Olson, B. D. (2012). Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Social Justice Scale (SJS). Am J Community Psychol, 50, 77-88.
• Venkatesh, K. (2015). Universal Design for Learning as a Framework for Social Justice: A Multicase Analysis of Undergraduate Preservice Teachers. Unpublished Phd. thesis. University of Boston College.
• Yang, Y. ve Green, S. B. (2011). Coefficient Alpha: A Reliability Coefficient for the 21st Century? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 377-392.